Hi, As the support for Application API becomes necessary again(per Tizen IVI requirement), would you revisit the doc? I will start with application info/event/ops APIs, as mentioned in the "Implementation Plan" section.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/10rDpiH2E2bSOp0gg3FNK-2eFIetkPygM98utBv-tB3I/edit# Thanks, Long Xiang > -----Original Message----- > From: Poussa, Sakari > Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2014 10:02 PM > To: Long, Xiang; Barbieri, Gustavo; Pozdnyakov, Mikhail; Kenneth Rohde > Christiansen; Oliveira, Caio > Cc: crosswalk-dev@lists.crosswalk-project.org > Subject: Re: [Crosswalk-dev] Intent to implement: [Tizen] Application API > > Hi, > > I am not saying that we should never implement it. Rather, take a timeout > now and see where and when the real need is. > > About your concerns: > > 1. See above. If we truly need it, we’ll do it. But now it is not the > right time. > 2. We need to re-visit our runtime model plans and those APIs are related > to that > 3. Wayland, new EFL and e18 versions are the biggest changes in 3.0. So > things will be different. > > BR; Sakari > > On 1/16/14, 5:02, "Long, Xiang" <xiang.l...@intel.com> wrote: > > >Hi Sakari, > > > >Right, the app control part is a poor-man's WebIntents/WebActivities. > >But as I know, the app control feature really works on Tizen(at least in > >2.1), there're already QA test cases for it. > >And seems the legacy WRT are adding new features to it, like > >"disposition" field support. > > > >IMO the app control part is an important system level app interaction > >API, native Tizen app also provides such feature. > >Other APIs also have dependency on it. One example is the Notification > >API(https://developer.tizen.org/dev-guide/2.2.1/org.tizen.web.device.apire > >ference/tizen/notification.html#postidp141560). > > > >So my concerns are: > >1. If we don't support app control, a big feature will be missed on > >Crosswalk, and API like Notification will break. > > > >2. How about other parts of the Application API set? Like app info, app > >launch/kill, app install/update/uninstall events, and etc. > >Should we implement them anyway? > > > >3. Do you know will there big change for the Tizen app core > >framework(like AUL, window management), and app control for Tizen 3.0? > >If this's true, then I'm totally agree to hold the app control part > >implementation ATM. > > > >Thanks, > >Xiang > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: Poussa, Sakari > >> Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2014 7:33 PM > >> To: Long, Xiang; Barbieri, Gustavo; Pozdnyakov, Mikhail; Kenneth Rohde > >> Christiansen > >> Cc: crosswalk-dev@lists.crosswalk-project.org > >> Subject: Re: [Crosswalk-dev] Intent to implement: [Tizen] Application > >>API > >> > >> All, > >> > >> I am very worried about this API for multiple reasons. > >> > >> First, it was invented for Tizen 1.0 as a Œpoor-mans¹ WebIntents. That > >>is, > >> temporary API similar to WebIntents and plan was to replace that in > >>Tizen > >> 2.0 with proper WebIntents. We all know what happened with WebIntents. > >>It > >> is dead but this API is not. > >> > >> Second, it is very complex API and may not work properly even in Tizen > >> 2.x. It would require a lot of time to develop, review, test and debug. > >> Big effort. > >> > >> Third, as I have said several times, we should focus on implementing > >>fewer > >> APIs but making sure the ones we do work properly. In my books, this API > >> does not be belong to the category we should implement now. We need to > >> check our stakeholders, namely IVI program, and see if they need this > >>API. > >> > >> So before we have a clear need for this API, I would put the > >> implementation effort on hold. > >> > >> BR; Sakari > >> > >> > >> On 1/15/14, 11:13, "Long, Xiang" <xiang.l...@intel.com> wrote: > >> > >> >Thanks for the comments, I have updated the doc. > >> >A new implementation plan section is created, and I copied some > >> >background info from the previous doc for reference. > >> > > >> >Thanks, > >> >Xiang > >> > > >> >> -----Original Message----- > >> >> From: Barbieri, Gustavo > >> >> Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2014 11:16 PM > >> >> To: Pozdnyakov, Mikhail; Kenneth Rohde Christiansen; Long, Xiang > >> >> Cc: crosswalk-dev@lists.crosswalk-project.org > >> >> Subject: RE: [Crosswalk-dev] Intent to implement: [Tizen] Application > >> >>API > >> >> > >> >> > -----Original Message----- > >> >> > From: Crosswalk-dev [mailto:crosswalk-dev-bounces@lists.crosswalk- > >> >> > project.org] On Behalf Of Pozdnyakov, Mikhail > >> >> > Sent: Tuesday, January 14, 2014 1:08 PM > >> >> > To: Kenneth Rohde Christiansen; Long, Xiang > >> >> > Cc: crosswalk-dev@lists.crosswalk-project.org > >> >> > Subject: Re: [Crosswalk-dev] Intent to implement: [Tizen] > >> >> > Application API > >> >> > > >> >> > Hi there, > >> >> > > >> >> > Unfortunately, for me it was really hard to understand the intended > >> >> > implementation proposal from the doc (left some comments there with > >> >> > clarification requirements). > >> >> > > >> >> > I can add also that API at https://developer.tizen.org/dev- > >> >> > > >>guide/2.2.1/org.tizen.web.device.apireference/tizen/application.html > >> >> > is really over-complicated. > >> >> > Think we might consider partial implementation, and we definitely > >> >> > should have an implementation schedule starting with the basic and > >> >> > simplest APIs. > >> >> > >> >> +1 > >> >_______________________________________________ > >> >Crosswalk-dev mailing list > >> >Crosswalk-dev@lists.crosswalk-project.org > >> >https://lists.crosswalk-project.org/mailman/listinfo/crosswalk-dev > > _______________________________________________ Crosswalk-dev mailing list Crosswalk-dev@lists.crosswalk-project.org https://lists.crosswalk-project.org/mailman/listinfo/crosswalk-dev
